Will we attend sporting events in the future?

This may seem like a daft question given the abundance of sold-out college football stadiums in College Station and Austin, and the Texans’ run of sellouts, but bear with me. Let’s first consider the present, look at the trend lines, and try to discern what this might mean for the future.

This weekend Texas A&M will play Rice University, at noon, in College Station. Temperatures during the second half are forecast to reach 100 degrees, and with full sun the heat index will be 105 degrees. NOAA considers this level of heat “dangerous.”

Full sun, baby. (Wikimedia)

My intent is not to pick on the Aggies, either. Although the other major college football games this week in Texas are all at night, other teams have done afternoon games in August and early September in the past.

Why do teams subject their fans, those who spend a lot of money to support their team, to potentially unsafe conditions? Money, of course, and exposure.

Here’s how Jason Cook, in A&M’s athletic department, explained it to me:

The SEC works with its television partners – CBS and ESPN – in regards to which games will be televised, as well as to what times these games will kick off. From a conference perspective, there is no additional direct financial benefit to specific game times. Texas A&M receives the same financial distribution from the SEC’s broadcast agreements, regardless of when we kick off.

All of Texas A&M’s football games will be televised this season, which includes a pay-per-view contest vs. Sam Houston State next Saturday. This is another benefit of our move to the SEC. Obviously, it is difficult to put a price tag on the exposure Texas A&M receives by playing on ESPN, with our game on Saturday vs. Rice following right behind College Football Gameday.

It’s important to keep this in perspective: In the not-so-distant past, many of Texas A&M’s non-conference – and conference games – were not even televised.

With the high temperatures expected, we are advising fans to stay hydrated, pack light and wear sunscreen. We will also have misting fans on the concourses, as well as an air-conditioned facility adjacent to Kyle Field open for fans during the game.

The bottom line is that all things equal, the university would obviously prefer to play an evening game. But all things are not equal, and what television wants, television gets. Fans do not come first. It’s like that across the sports landscape.

The situation at A&M made me wonder whether fans will always be willing to play second fiddle to television. According to CNBC, live attendance in major U.S. sports – major league baseball, pro basketball and football, motor sports and college football – has declined or leveled off the last three to five years.

I believe part of the reason is that, for younger people, the students who would go to these games, its easier to stay digitally connected to the things they want to be connected to at home. At home, of course, is also where big screen televisions have become the norm in the living room over the last decade. For many people the best seat in the house is in front of the television.

In a recent article on a slight decline in college football attendance, USA Today summed it up thusly:

Blame it on technology. In an era when fans at home can watch multiple games at the same time, when the stadium video board can’t match the number of highlights available on an iPad, when fans inside a stadium get poor cell-phone reception while those at home are texting and Twittering, big-time college programs are feeling pressure to keep pace.

It seems to me that a general attitude by colleges and pro teams that television dollars and exposures are more important than a fan experience probably would have a negative effect as well.

Now, I do think college and pro teams are well aware of the threat posed by technology. Part of the reason the Texans installed a new $16.5 million scoreboard at Reliant Stadium was to enhance the stadium-going experience for fans.

277 feet of attention grabbing digital bits. (Houston Chronicle)

And there is a lot going for live events – proximity to the star players, large video boards, the excitement of the crowd, tailgating and more. But the trend lines are pretty clear: ticket prices are rising more rapidly than inflation, a single beer costs as much as a 12-pack in some stadiums, and technology in the home is making watching the game from there a much more rewarding and immersive experience. Especially on a day when temperatures will reach 100 degrees.

In any case I do wonder whether the technological incentives for fans to attend sporting events in 10, 20 or 30 years will outweigh the disincentives.

What say you? Do you attend more or fewer sporting events than you used to?

34 Responses

There will always be fans at the game, but if the trends continue I wouldn’t be surprised to see attendance drop. I don’t think the weather has a lot to do with it. It’s the expense of the game and the digital availability increases.

What say you? Do you attend more or fewer sporting events than you used to?

I attend more sporting events than I used to but only because it is a perk of my job. If I had to pay to attend, I probably wouldn’t. As you point out, the costs of attending have gotten ridiculous, simply because there are some folks who are willing to pay those costs (i.e., the same folks who think that taking a geophysicist to a ball game will help sell their seismic data).

What I think will happen is that fewer and fewer ordinary people will attend (unless the teams put something like the Astros’ “All you can eat seats“) and the stadia will be filled with business groups. Meanwhile, sports bars will do a bang-up business because they give you the camaraderie of the crowd combined with less expensive beer and food.

The first real indication of this will be the lowering of ticket prices and fewer seats in stadiums. Even now, the cost if attending a texans game, or A&M or UT is pretty outrageous, and yet those stadiums are constantly full.

Having stood on the third deck at A&M, I can attest that it was HOT!! But, it was worth it because the thrill of the crowd is something you hardly get in a living room.

the Texans installed the new board-for more revenue-half the board is full of advertising.

I think the long term issue for sports teams will be dwindling fan base-past generations could take their kids to many games and build an interest with the young-today the cost of attending a game cuts out most family’s from attending more than one or two games a year.

I believe attendance will keep dropping. But some sports will see the drop before others. Baseball games in many cities is already sparsely attended. College basketball attendance is poor for all but a few universities. NFL ties local TV viewing to selling out, so they have an advantage. And college football (at least the football factories) will be able to keep attendance strong moreso than other sports.

The trend in the future (outside of college football factories) is going to be less seats in total, but more high priced seats and boxes.

I know I’d much rather stay home and watch an sporting event on my large HD screen. I like to go to a few Rockets and Dynamo games a year. You couldn’t pay me enough to go to Reliant for a Texan game.

Eric, have you took your kids to a Texan game? I would advise against it. That place is like a 60,000 seat bar, with drunks, rude language, and too much aggression.

I feel terrible for fans of the visiting team in that place because they are subjected to a constant stream of hatred and vitriol from Texan fans. NFL games are clearly not a family atmosphere like MLB games are.

Really? You read my post and your takeaway was to correct me on my usage of fewer and less? Please, get out your pretentious red pen for this next paragraph.

…

For all intenstive purposes, each year I attend less and less number of sporting events. In this economy, you’re available money to attend is fewer than before. But as a sports fan, your conditioned to want to attend live games. And because Houston is so big, we have further to travel to get to the stadium. That extra travel farther extends the economic pain of attending the event. The high price of the event has a big affect on our pocketbook and frankly that effects the family happiness. Irregardless, attending a sporting event is fun. My advise is to go to a few each year. But I would advice you to sneak in you’re own drink to lower the cost of attending. The principal cost at these games can be food and drink.

Personally, I attend very few sporting events these days. Having two children under ten will cause that to happen. Also, I live 1000 miles from the college teams I support, so college games around here have minimal draw for me.

And once sports on 4k television is available, you will be able to have a wall-sized TV with beautiful quality, so watching at home will be better than watching from the stadium (in visual terms).

But I also agree with TexasGuac – the thrill of the crowd cannot be replaced, and when you are emotionally and surrounded by fellow fans, the stadium will always be a better experience than a TV, even if it is 100 degrees outside.

I don’t frequently attend sporting events (maybe 1-2 a year), but it’s no more or less than I used to. I find, though, that all the giant scoreboards and videoscreens and such *detract* from the experience. If I want all that, I could go to a sports bar. Watching a game live, I want to see it live, with an announcer. Gah, I sound like an old fogey and I’m only 42.

I remember paying five bucks to see A&M beat Texas back in the fall of 1979. I was outraged at the price!

I enjoy going to certain games, and I’ll continue as long as I’m able. That being said, I have a pretty good seat in my living room and there’s no line to use the restroom or to get a Dr. Pepper from the fridge.

Well what would the Houston sports Authority do with all of these shiny new stadiums? Would the taxpayer get stuck with all of those currently rated junk bonds that were issued to build them by the Sports Authority and co-signed by you the taxpayer?

Ah so you were not told you co-signed those loans and bonds? Well now you voted the people in power that approved this for yyou so pay it.

The real underlying question is, how many more generations can humans expect to support the lifestyle where entertainment takes a bigger and bigger piece of the pie, at the expense of productivity? At some point, if it continues, it will all collapse.

With 57 zillion inch High Definition TV’s, Man caves where man clans can gather with tons of food and drink, Billions of cameras on the field, overhead, end zone, 50 yard line, etc, etc, special effects showing scrimmage lines and 10 yard lines, etc, etc, etc, good commentators explaining what you missed, who needs to wade through tons of traffic and crowds to go to a game anymore?
Went to a game once, hosted by the boss with 12 of us, sat in the end zone, couldn’t see what was going on, hardly knew what was going on, would have rather watched it on TV.

Reliant Stadium unveiled the largest video screen in any NFL staduim, but they neglected to tell us that 2/3 of the screen will be used for advertising. Did anyone else notice this at the game last week? If only 1/3 of the screen is used for actual live video, then it is essentially the smallest video screen in any NFL stadium.

Much less attended for me. Proximity is one factor, but I hate crowds, and all that goes with that. I love watching the games on TV however. Some of my alma maters are not in crowded stadiums (;-{)), so I do go watch some. About the only crowded, big ticket event I insist on being there is the Masters, that is just necessary to attend in person.

Those are about the only sporting events I go to (with an occasional minor league baseball game). With a family to support (two of them kids in college), I can no longer afford to take myself, let one or more of them, to big-time college football games, or even the occasional Dallas Cowboy game I used to attend.

I find the in-person experience very compelling (especially the college football experience) but simply cannot afford it anymore. AFAIC, even HD big-screen TV with all the bells & whistles is a poor substitute for being there.

Last trip to Dallas convinced me that over half of the folks there were watching the game on the big screen and paying no attention whatsoever to the action on the field. So even if they go to the game, they’re watching it on the screen. Just like at home. Complete with commercials. But with a sore neck and empty pocket to show for the priviledge….

also, Aggies like to be there in person as The Fightin’ Texas Aggie Band rarely gets shown on TV, and seeing it on a big screen from a vertical skycam is absolutely awesome.

If I’m going to pay exorbitant prices for tickets and food all for the pleasure of watching a giant screen, I’d rather go to the movies. At least then it’s indoors in the air conditioning and I don’t have to pay $20 for parking.

I didn’t see anything about how dangerous this could be for the players.
Astroturf is hot to the touch on a hot day. The stadium is designed
in such a way that it will NOT get a breeze, and shade is an after thought
at best.

As long as businesses can deduct part of the cost, the stadiums will be full. If the team is WINNING.
I much prefer to watch at home. When I was younger, I much prefered to go to the games. I’ve been to a game in Green Bay. It was crazy! That was something I’ll never forget. The same for a game at the old Viking field when it was horribly cold with, rain, then ice, then snow, & then very high winds with the temp. well below zero. The original Houston Aeros played in the old colosseum. I loved those games because you were right on top of the action. We had a great team and Gordie Howe and his sons played. Back when the Astros were great, playing in the dome, I loved those games.
I would like to attend a World Cup final.

Fans at games are only needed for the “atmosphere” in the TV feed. Like any TV studio show, only the most exuberant and outgoing fans should be admitted…for free. If they played all the games in China it would even be cheaper and hence, more profitable.